IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infotm/v21y2020i1d10.1007_s10799-019-00298-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A study on policy measure for knowledge-based management in ICT companies: focused on appropriability mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • Seong-Taek Park

    (SungKyunKwan University)

  • Jae-Rim Jung

    (Namseoul University)

  • Chang Liu

    (Taishan University)

Abstract

This study investigated the status of appropriability mechanisms and relevant policy measures as an option to secure the returns on R&D investment, which businesses employ to create new knowledge and competitiveness for knowledge-based management. Also, it conducted the AHP analysis of responses from a range of ICT-related experts surveyed. Moreover, to explore the dynamic structure of appropriability mechanisms from a holistic dynamic perspective, this study drew up a causal loop diagram (CLD) about system dynamics methodology. System dynamics is an approach to realistically modeling a series of causalities and analytically simulating their dynamic variation. System dynamics incorporates those causalities into a cognitive map, plots the status and change of variables on a stock-flow diagram, and applies historical data to derive realistic coefficients. Also, system dynamics has an advantage of drawing up scenarios in line with changing external environment factors or top management’s strategic orientation and simulating scenario-specific outcomes. Finally, to compare the combined options in terms of the effects of different scenarios on the growth of appropriability over time, a simulation model was developed based on the CLD and AHP analysis results. This paper derived some policy implications for knowledge-based management from the analytic simulation based on different scenarios and suggested responsive measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Seong-Taek Park & Jae-Rim Jung & Chang Liu, 2020. "A study on policy measure for knowledge-based management in ICT companies: focused on appropriability mechanisms," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infotm:v:21:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10799-019-00298-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s10799-019-00298-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10799-019-00298-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10799-019-00298-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katrin Hussinger, 2006. "Is Silence Golden? Patents Versus Secrecy At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(8), pages 735-752.
    2. Yue Zhang & Shukuan Zhao & Xiaobo Xu, 2016. "Business model innovation: an integrated approach based on elements and functions," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 303-310, September.
    3. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    4. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Shukuan Zhao & Yu Sun & Xiaobo Xu, 2016. "Research on open innovation performance: a review," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 279-287, September.
    6. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    7. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    8. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    9. Hong Jiang & Shukuan Zhao & Chang Liu & Yong Chen, 2016. "The role, formation mechanism, and dynamic mechanism of action of technology standards in industrial systems," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 289-302, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hector John T. Manaligod & Michael Joseph S. Diño & Sunmoon Jo & Roy C. Park, 0. "Knowledge discovery computing for management," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-2.
    2. Mohammed Musa Bayero, 2023. "IT Infrastructure, Knowledge Management and Firm Competitiveness: Exploring Mediating Role of IT Outsourcing in Nigeria," International Journal of Global Business and Competitiveness, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 43-58, June.
    3. Yang, Jialei & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia, 2022. "Evolving appropriability – Variation in the relevance of appropriability mechanisms across industries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Hector John T. Manaligod & Michael Joseph S. Diño & Sunmoon Jo & Roy C. Park, 2020. "Knowledge discovery computing for management," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 61-62, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bos, Brenda & Broekhuizen, Thijs L.J. & de Faria, Pedro, 2015. "A dynamic view on secrecy management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2619-2627.
    2. Thomä Jörg & Zimmermann Volker, 2013. "Knowledge Protection Practices in Innovating SMEs," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 233(5-6), pages 691-717, October.
    3. Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean & Traoré, Namatié, 2008. "Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1530-1547, October.
    4. Gallié, Emilie-Pauline & Legros, Diégo, 2012. "French firms’ strategies for protecting their intellectual property," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 780-794.
    5. Thomä, Jörg & Bizer, Kilian, 2013. "To protect or not to protect? Modes of appropriability in the small enterprise sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 35-49.
    6. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Sanghoon Ahn & Bronwyn H. Hall & Keun Lee (ed.), 2014. "Intellectual Property for Economic Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15464.
    8. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    9. Insu Cho & Heejun Park & Joseph Kim, 2012. "The moderating effect of innovation protection mechanisms on the competitiveness of service firms," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 6(3), pages 369-386, September.
    10. Mounir Amdaoud & Christian Le Bas, 2020. "Firm Patenting and Types of innovation in Least Developed Countries. An Empirical Investigation on Patenting Determinants," Working Papers hal-03059466, HAL.
    11. Leiponen, Aija & Byma, Justin, 2009. "If you cannot block, you better run: Small firms, cooperative innovation, and appropriation strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1478-1488, November.
    12. Matthias Siller & Christoph Hauser & Janette Walde & Gottfried Tappeiner, 2015. "Measuring regional innovation in one dimension: More lost than gained?," Working Papers 2015-14, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    13. Philipp Köllinger, 2005. "Why IT Matters: An Empirical Study of E-Business Usage, Innovation, and Firm Performance," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 495, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Hermans, Ben & Leus, Roel & Looy, Bart Van, 2023. "Deciding on scheduling, secrecy, and patenting during the new product development process: The relevance of project planning models," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    15. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    16. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    17. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    18. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    19. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    20. Delphine GALLAUD & Maximilien NAYARADOU, 2012. "Vers une ouverture des stratégies de protection de l’innovation ?," Working Papers 28, Réseau de Recherche sur l’Innovation. / Research Network on Innovation.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:infotm:v:21:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10799-019-00298-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.